Tuesday, 31 March 2015

In my previous post all I said was that those who support burqa or hijab and oral talaq should unfollow me and go to some other fb page where they are comfortable.. I did not tell anyone not to wear burqa or say oral talaq. Do wear burqa and say oral talaq as much as you like. My only request is please do not come to my fb page. Was that asking too much ? After all, it is my fb page, not anyone else's.

But look at the torrent of ot abuses I got. Many comments called me mentally sick. Many asked how such a person like me could become a Judge ? Some asked whether I preferred women going about nude or in a bikini ( as if wearing a sari or salwar kameez is going about nude or in a bikini ). Many comments were so filthy that I cannot even mention them, and I had to delete them. I have preserved one sample given below :

" dear markandey katju u are a dog I learn it by reading ur comment I would like to give u a n example which choclate would u like to eat one which is without cover or other having cover ofcoursecwd cover its same like this is the order of almighty god for women to cover their chastity because god knows there r open and besharam dog like u "

The Chief Minister of Haryana, Mr. Khattar, has said in a meeting of the Bharat Vikas Parishad on Sunday that verses of the Gita will be made compulsory in all schools in Haryana.

I am totally opposed to this move, as it is against secularism prescribed by our Constitution.

In my opinion Gita, Mahabharat or Ramayana should not be made compulsory in schools. In a country of such diversity as ours, nothing of this kind should be compelled or imposed, as that is against our nation’s secular feature and the Constitution.

Muslims and Christians may not want their children to be taught these books, and hence their children should not be forced to read them.

The Chief Minister said that Gita shows 'the right direction to society'. But Muslims may say that only the Quran shows the right direction, Christians may say that only the Bible shows the right direction, Sikhs may say that only the Guru Granth Saheb shows it, Parsis may say only the Zend Avesta shows it, etc,

In my opinion such compulsion or imposition will do great harm to the unity of the country.

Sunday, 29 March 2015

I have seen Kejriwal's speech before the National Executive in which he has made many allegations against Yogendra Yadav. and Prashant Bhushan

The point, however, is why Yogendra Yadav and Prashant Bhushan were not allowed to reply, and instead voting against them was done immediately after Kejriwal's speech ?

In justice there is a requirement that both sides should be heard. Why was there such a hurry to pass the resolution without even affording an opportunity of hearing to those against whom the resolution was being passed ? Does this not create an impression that everything was pre-planned ?

In his speech Kejriwal seeks to create an impression that he is a martyr, an innocent victim, a lamb sought to be devoured by wolves. If that were the truth, why was there a fear of a counter version being put up by those two 'wolves' ?

Ramzan Chaudhuri and Yogendra Yadav have both said that when immediately after Kejriwal.s speech the resolution against PB and YY was moved they protested that at least PB and YY should be heard in their defence, but their request was rejected Was this fair ?

The Aam Admi Party, and its leader, who claimed to introduce a new kind of clean and transparent politics in India, are now totally exposed after what happened in their National Executive meeting yesterday. There is a Don Quixote, and there is a gang of Sancho Panzas, and now, of course, it seems that there are also a lot of bouncers.

Saturday, 28 March 2015

Gandhi injected religion into politics for 3 decades by constantly advocating Hindu religious ideas like Ramrajya, goraksha, varnashram, brahmacharya, etc in public meetings and in his articles ( see my earlier posts and blogs e.g. 'Gandhi--a British agent', 'Gandhi and caste', etc ) This no doubt secured him power over the backward Hindu masses as he was perceived as a saint or baba ( and even today babas have a powerful hold among many ), but the price paid was Partition and its horrors, as the Muslims were inevitably driven towards the Muslim League.

This fake, who did so much harm to our country, has been called the ' Father of the Nation', and for exposing him I was condemned by Parliament without even giving me a hearing, which even murderers get.

Since I was denied a hearing by Parliament, I decided to go to the people, who are the highest Court in a democracy, through teehe press, to get a hearing

Thursday, 26 March 2015

Now that India has lost against Australia in cricket, what subject will the great Indian media focus on next ? Some affair of an Indian film star ? The internal problems of AAP ? Or some other frivolous non issue ?

But what can the editors and T.V. anchors do ? They will lose their highly paid jobs if they deal with the real issues facing the nation, or tell the truth. After all, they have families to support, and a life style to maintain

Tuesday, 24 March 2015

The British promoted Tagore ( through Yeats ) to divert attention from the revolutionary direction Sharad Chandra Chattopadhyaya was taking literature ( see his ' Pather Dabi ', which was banned by the British, and the price of one copy of which was said to have become the price of one Mauser pistol ) towards nonsensical spiritualism and mysticism, which can only be called escapism in a country with such tremendous poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, etc.

Tagore served the British loyally in the field of literature ( for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize ), just as Gandhi served the British loyally in politics, by diverting the revolutionary freedom struggle against the British led by by Bhagat Singh, Surya Sen ( Masterda ), Chandsrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqulla, Khudiram Bose, Rajguru, Ramprasad Bismil, etc towards the harmless nonsensical channel called satyagrah

There is a bug in my head--the bug called patriotism. I don't know how it got there, but it has been there for half a century, and will remain in my head as long as I live, driving me on and on.

Sometimes I wish it were not there, and i could live a normal life, like other people, making money for myself and my family, and living comfortably. Often people think me crazy. I have sometimes even neglected my family duties because of that bug, which i deeply regret.

I have told my family members that i cannot change, I will do my duty to my country come what may. I have a mission in my life, and I have equipped myself perfectly for pursuing that mission by intense labour ( study, discussions, reflection, etc ) for half a century, and I am totally focused on it.

That mission is to help my country become prosperous and abolish poverty, unemployment, hunger and other social and economic evils. I know of course that this will not be achieved in my lifetime, but I will have contributed to that ultimate goal

If anyone helps and supports me in this mission I will of course be grateful. But even if no one does, I will carry on alone. What was that song ? "Jodi tor dak shune na keu ashe tobe ekla cholo re " ( If no one responds to your call, go on alone )

The only solution to the Kashmir problem is reunification of India and Pakistan ( and Bangladesh ) under a strong, modern, secular government which does not tolerate religious extremism or bigotry of any kind, whether Hindu or Muslim, and works for the welfare and prosperity of all people

Let me make some things very clear. I am quite intolerant of what i regard as nonsense, stupidity, feudal and backward ideas.
Hence the following persons are requested to unfollow me and go to some other page where they feel comfortable. If they comment on my page they will be immediately thrown out by being blocked :
1. Those who support the caste system
2. Those who regard dalits as inferior.
3. Those who are against Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who is one of my heroes.
4. Those who are in favour of feudal, backward practices like oral talaq and burqa

So if you fall in any of the above categories, my request to you is to unfollow me and get out of my facebook page. I have had enough of idiots and will not tolerate them any more.

Monday, 23 March 2015

I have given detailed reasons why I called Gandhi objectively a British agent and Bose objectively a Japanese agent in a series of posts on facebook and on my blog e.g. ' Gandhi--a British agent ', ' Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose ', ' Britishers set up statue of their agent in London ', ' Alice in Wonderland ', ' Gandhi and Caste ', ' Long live our real freedom fighters ', ' My ideals are Ashok and Akbar, not Gandhi ' ( published in Navbharat Times in Hindi ), etc.

I do not mind criticism, but the critic should point out the flaw in my reasoning, and give his own reasoning. Instead of doing so what has usually been hurled on me is abuse.

I once again request everyone to read my posts, including the one given below, and if he/she wishes to criticize me he/she is welcome, but the person must give reasons, not just abuse or homilies and platitudes

BOL KI LAB AZAD HAIN TERE, BOL ZUBAAN AB TAK TERI HAI

I regard the true freedom fighters of our country as Surya Sen ( Masterda ), and his other compatriots of the Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar, Bhagat Singh, Khudiram Bose, Chandrashekhar Azad ( whose memorial in Alfred Park in Allahabad I would visit often to bow my head there ), Ashfaqulla, Rajguru, Ram Prasad Bismil ( whose song ' Sarfaroshi ki tamanna ab hamaare dil mein hai ' is known to many ), etc.

In our national historiography these real patriots are barely mentioned, they are generally relegated to a footnote, and treated as mavericks, deviants or outsiders, not freedom fighters. That fake ' Mahatma' and his coterie, and that pawn of the Japanese fascists, are depicted as the real freedom fighters.

Gandhi described the militant Indian youth fighting against British Imperialism as ' misguided souls ' . He often said that militant nationalism was injurious to India's struggle for freedom. In reality he knew that if those methods became popular among the Indian masses his own popularity would decline, and his ' Mahatmahood ' may disappear.

When the British sentenced Bhagat Singh to death, Gandhi made no effort to save his life. He never wrote any letter to the British Viceroy to commute his sentence , nor did he issue any public appeal for this purpose, and he never went to meet Bhagat Singh in jail when the latter was on hunger strike.

By diverting the genuine freedom struggle against the British from its revolutionary path to harmless and nonsensical channels like satyagrah, Gandhi was ensuring that British rule over India would continue.

It is said that Gandhi gave us Independence in 1947. This is totally false. In fact by diverting the genuine revolutionary independence struggle against the British in India ( see one of my earlier posts ) to harmless and nonsensical channels like ' Satyagrah ' Gandhi was ensuring that India should not become independent.

Why then did the British leave ? Surely it was not because of the dramas Gandhi was doing ( fasting, salt march, etc ). Does anyone give up an Empire because of this ? Did America win independence from England by satyagrahs, or by bullets fired by George Washington's Continental Army in the American War of independence ( 1775-1781 ) ? Did Latin America win independence from Spain by satyagrah, or by Bolivar's battles ?

No, it was because Germany attacked England in the Second World War and considerably weakened it ( in fact Germany would probably have conquered England if America had not helped it ) that England, realizing that she could not continue holding on to India politically, withdrew. So it is not Gandhi who gave us Independence but Adolf Hitler ( though of course that was not his intention )

I have also called ' Netaji ' Subhas Chandra Bose a Japanese agent, a remark over which many people have got incensed. But If ' Netaji ' was not a Japanese agent, why did he give up the fight against the British when the Japanese surrendered ? He should have carried on a guerilla war against the British.

If the Japanese had been victorious against the British do you seriously think they would have granted independence to India ? No, they would have made India a Japanese colony, and ruthlessly exploited and looted it, as they did to parts of China which were under their occupation..

In fact Bose was being used by the Japanese, and they would have bumped him off the moment his utility for them was over. He was no doubt a brave and personally honest man, but he had become an agent of Japanese fascist imperialism.

The genuine patriots and revolutionaries, who have been sidelined in our history, were as much victims of the Congress Party, which was firmly in Gandhi's grip, as of British Imperialism

The Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha passed unanimous resolutions condemning me for my statements on Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose, without even giving me an opportunity of hearing.

The rules of natural justice and elementary decency required that before condemning me I should have been given an opportunity of hearing.

I therefore request both Houses of Parliament, through you, to recall the resolutions and apologize to me, or else to suspend the resolutions and give me an opportunity of hearing, personally or through my lawyer.

Kindly place this email before both Houses of Parliament at the earliest.

I am presently in America, but can be contacted by email

Regards

Justice Katju

P.S.

I had the email id of the Speaker, Lok Sabha, but I did not have the email id of Mr. Hamid Ansari, so I sent this email to the Secretary General of the Rajya Sabha, with the request that he may place it before Mr. Ansari

When communal riots occurred in May 1987 in Meerut, U.P. the Provincial Armed Constabulary ( P.A.C.) rounded up 40-45 Muslim youth in mohalla Hashimpur, took them on trucks to a remote place, shot them in cold blood, and dumped their bodies in water canals

16 P.A.C. constables were chargesheeted, but recording of evidence began only in July 2006, that is, more than 19 years after the incident. On 21.3.2015 all the accused, except those who had already died, were acquitted.

Today, 23rd March, is the death anniversary of those whom I call as 'our real freedom fighters', ( as contrasted to that fake freedom fighter Gandhi ), Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru who were hanged on this day by the Britishers in Lahore jail, their bodies secretly burnt and their ashes thrown away in some unknown place. Those other real freedom fighters, Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqulla, Khudiram Bose, Ram Prasad Bismil, etc had been killed or hanged by the British earlier, and that great revolutionary Surya Sen ( Masterda ) in 1934

In my speech recently at Berkeley University i California I said that a real freedom struggle can never be non violent. Was the American War of Independence against the British ( from 1775 to 1781 ) non violent ? Did George Washington fight with the British by presenting them flowers and satyagrah, or with bullets ?

It is commonsense that no one gives up a huge empire because of hunger strikes, salt marches and other such Gandhian dramas. A real revolutionary struggle against British rule had begun through the abovenamed real freedom fighters, but it was still in its nascent stage when it was nipped in the bud by that cunning British agent Gandhi, who successfully diverted this genuine freedom struggle from its revolutionary direction to a harmless, nonsensical channel called satyagrah, which meant presenting the other cheek when your enemy strikes you on one cheek, instead of bravely exchanging blow for blow.

Our real freedom fighters and patriots have been carefully relegated to a footnote in our national historiography, and that cunning rascal Gandhi has been portrayed as the ' Father of the Nation ' who gave us freedom ' bina khadak bina dhaal '.

Gandhi described Bhagat Singh and the militant Indian youth fighting against British Imperialism as ' misguided souls '

When the British sentenced Bhagat Singh to death, Gandhi made no effort to save his life. He never wrote any letter to the British Viceroy to commute his sentence, and never issued any public appeal to that effect. In all probability he was happy that his rivals as freedom fighters had been eliminated, otherwise his popularity and ' Mahatmahood ' would have disappeared.

India got independence not due to the dramas of Gandhi but because in the Second World War Germany attacked England and weakened it ( in fact if America had not helped her it is probable that Germany would have conquered England ), and because of American pressure on the British

Sunday, 22 March 2015

I had said in a televised interview with Karan Thapar that the Indian media deliberately diverts attention of the Indian people from the real issues facing the Indian masses which are socio-economic e.g. massive poverty, unemployment, malnourishment, lack of healthcare and good education for the masses,farmers' suicides, etc towards non issues like cricket, lives of film stars, astrology, politics ( which has gone down to a very low level ), etc.

Presently the Indian media seems to be focussed on the Cricket World Cup, as if that is the real problem of the Indian people. There seems to be little of other news apart from the forthcoming match between India and Australia, which is being discussed as if it is a Mahabharat war.

In India cricket is one of the opiums of the masses, the others being filmstars, politics, astrology, etc ---evidently the Indian people cannot be drugged by just one kind of opium, so several are needed The Roman Emperors used to say ' If you cannot give the people bread give them circuses '. The Indian Establishment says, ' If you cannot give the people employment, food, healthcare, education, etc give them cricket '.

Today is the birth anniversary of one of my heroes, Surya Sen, also known as Masterda, the great revolutionary fighter for India's freedom.

After the famous Chittagong armoury raid on 18th April 1930 which he led he was betrayed and arrested by the British police who tortured him, broke all his teeth with a hammer, pulled out all his nails, and broke his limbs and joints, before hanging him.

Gandhi repeatedly said in the 1920s that ' Hindus must follow their hereditary professions ' and that ' prohibition of intermarriage between people of different varnas was necessary for a rapid evolution of the soul '. In the 1930s he changed his tune and started saying that he was opposed to caste but supported varna and hereditary professions, as if there is a difference between the two

This hypocrisy was typical of Gandhi. Whenever he found his stupid feudal ideas unacceptable he tried to obfuscate.

Thus in 1921 he said in his journal Young India " I am a sanatani Hindu. I believe in varnashram dharma. I believe in protection of the cow "

He also said " I believe that caste has saved Hinduism from disintegration. One of my correspondents suggests that we should abolish the caste system but adopt the class system of Europe, meaning that the idea of hereditary castes should be rejected. I am inclined to think that the law of heredity is an eternal law, and any attempt to alter it must lead to utter confusion. Hindus believe in transmigration of the soul, and Nature will adjust the balance by degrading a Brahmin if he misbehaves to a lower caste, and upgrading one who lives the life of a Brahmin to a Brahmin in his next life. "

He also wrote " The beauty of the caste system is that it does not base itself upon distinctions of wealth-possessions. Money, as history has proved, is the greatest disruptive force in the world C aste is but an extension of the principle of the family. Both are governed by blood and heredity. Western scientists are busy trying to prove that heredity is an illusion andthat milieu is everything. The.experience of many lands goes against the conclusions of these scientists; but even accepting their doctrine of milieu, it is easy to prove that milieu can be conserved and developed more through caste than through class. As we all know, change comes very slowly in social life, and thus, as a matter of fact, caste has allowed new groupings to suit the changes in lives. But these changes are quiet and easy, as a change in the shape of the clouds. It is difficultto imagine a better harmonious human adjustment.Caste does not connote superiority or inferiority. It simply recognizes different outlooks and corresponding modes of life.But it is no use denying the fact that a sort of hierarchy has been evolved in the caste system, but it cannot be called the cre-ation of the Brahmins. When all castes accept a common goal of life, a hierarchy is inevitable, because all castes cannot realize the ideal in equal degree."

Again in 1921 Gandhi said : “I believe that if Hindu society has been able to stand, it is because it is founded on the caste system. A community which can create the caste system must be said to possess unique power of organization.To destroy the caste system and adopt the Western European social system means that Hindus must give up the principle of hereditary occupation which is the soul of the caste system.The hereditary principle is an eternal principle.To change it is to create disorder. It will be a chaos if every day a Brahmin is to be changed into a Shudra, and a Shudra is to be changed into a Brahmin. The caste system is a natural order of society.... I am opposed to all those who are out to destroy the caste system.”

In 1926 Gandhi writes ": In accepting the fourfold division I am simply accepting the laws of Nature, taking for granted what is in-herent in human nature and the law of heredity.... It is not possible in one birth entirely to undo the results of our past doings."

Gandhi's hypocrisy can again be seen by the following statement in 1927 :

: " In my conception of the law of varna, no one is superior to any other.... A scavenger [.a rubbish-collector or a latrine- or street-sweeper] has the same status as a Brahmin "

Is this not ridiculous and farcical ? Do Brahmins regard shudras as their equals ?.It is like the devious doctrine of 'separate but equal ' propounded by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1896. Gandhi does not want abolition of the caste system, he says all castes have the same status, which is nonsense.

In 1925 Gandhi says: " There is no harm if a person belonging to one varna acquires the knowledge or science and art specialized in by persons belonging to other varnas. But as far as the way of earning his living is concerned, he must follow the occupationof the varna to which he belongs, which means he must follow the hereditary profession of his forefathers.The object of the varna system is to prevent competition and class struggle and class war. I believe in the varna system because it fixes the duties and occupations of persons.Varna means the determination of a man’s occupation before he is born. In the varna system no man has any liberty to choose his occupation."

This statement is again obfuscation. Why will anyone acquire a skill unless he can use it to earn his bread ?

In 1931 Gandhi said: " I do not believe in caste in the modern sense. It is an excrescence and a handicap on progress. Nor do I believe in inequalities between human beings. We are all absolutely equal. But equality is of souls and not bodies. We have to realize equality in the midst of this apparent inequality. Assumption of superiority by any person over any other is a sin against God and man. Thus caste, in so far as it connotes distinctions in status, is an evil

.I do however believe in varna which is based on hereditary occupations. Varnas are four to mark four universal occupations – imparting knowledge, defending the defenceless, carrying on agriculture and commerce, and performing service through physical labor. These occupations are common to all mankind, but Hinduism, having recognized them as the law of our being, has made use of it in regulating social relations and conduct. Gravitation affects us all whether one knows its exist or not "

The above statement really takes the cake. On the one hand Gandhi says he does not believe in caste, on the other hand he says that he believes in hereditary occupations, and says it is like the law of gravity. But hereditary occupations is the basis of caste ( see my blog on caste system on justicekatju.blogspot.in ). Does this contradictory statement require any comment, except to say that this man can wriggle around and say that 2+2=4 and 2+2=5 in the same breath ?

In 1932 Gandhi said: "My own opinion is that the varna system has just now broken down. There is no true Brahmin or true Kshatriya or Vaishya. We are all Shudras, i.e. one varna. If this position is accepted, then the thing becomes easy. If this does not satisfy our vanity, then we are all Brahmins. Removal of Untouchability does mean root-and-branch destruction of the idea of superiority and inferiority "

Does the above statement make any sense ? At least I cannot make any head or tail out of it.

In 1933 Dr. Ambedkar said "There will be outcastes as long as there are castes, and nothing can emancipate the outcaste except the destruction of the caste system.". This was a logical argument of Dr. Ambedkar.

But see how Gandhi replies. He said " Dr. Ambedkar is bitter. He has every reason to feel so. Yet I do not believe the caste system, even as distinguished from varnashrama [the scheme of duties traditionally linked to the caste system], to be an “odious and vicious dogma. It has its limitations and defects, but there is nothing sinful about it, as there is about Untouchability; and if Untouchability is a by-product of the system, it is only in the same sense that an ugly growth is of a body, or weeds of a crop ".

Thus Gandhi is not against the caste system but only against Untouchability.

Gandhi admitted that his ideal of a varna system with everyone enjoying equal economic and social status probably had no historical warrant:

: But when asked whether in ancient India there was much difference in economic status and social privileges between the four varnas Gandhi replied " That may be historically true. But misapplication or an imperfect understanding of the law must not lead to the ignoring of the law itself. By constant striving we have to enrich it ".

So Gandhi is not against the caste system but only its 'misapplication.' ( whatever that may mean )..

The contrast between Gandhi’s and Ambedkar’s views was heightened by their respective relations to the Jat-Pat-Todak Mandal, a new organization which was dedicated to promoting a casteless Hinduism. Gandhi told its secretary:in1932: "If eradication of castes means the abolition of varna I do not approve of it. But I am with you if your aim is to end the innumerable caste distinctions ".

Dr Ambedkar corrrectly analysed the cause of Gandhi's contradictory statements and obfuscation regarding caste as " the double role which the Mahatma wants to play – of a Mahatma and a politician. As a Mahatma he may be trying to spiritualize politics. Whether he has succeeded in it or not, politics have certainly commercialized him. A politician must know that society cannot bear the whole truth. If he is speaking the whole truth, it is bad for his politics. The reason why the Mahatma is always supporting caste and varna is because he is afraid that if he opposes them he will lose his place in politics.... Whatever may be the source of this confusion, the Mahatma must be told that he is deceiving himself and also deceiving the people by preaching caste under the name of varna ".

This is the man who has been thrust down the throats of Indians as the ' Father of the Nation ' !

By the decision of the Indian Supreme Court in Indian Medical Association vs. V.P. Shantha, A.I.R. 1996 S.C. 550, doctors were brought under the purview of the Indian Consumer Protection Act as they were rendering services. Hence if a doctor commits medical negligence he can be held liable and ordered to pay damages to the patient.

By the same logic lawyers should also be brought under the purview of the Act as they are also rendering services. This will bring accountability into the legal profession in India, but the lawyers stoutly oppose this.

At present the unfortunate situation is that while there are many upright lawyers, increasingly a large number of lawyers are resorting to unethical practices, bringing a bad name to what was supposed to be a noble profession. Often to extract as much money as they can many lawyers indulge in all kinds of wrong practices like deliberately prolonging a case so as to extract more money out of the client. If there is nothing in a case a lawyer should frankly say so to the client, but how many lawyers do that?

Very few lawyers nowadays tell the client frankly not to waste money in a useless litigation, and most accept briefs however frivolous to make money. Some lawyers are even alleged to have colluded with the opposite party.

Many lawyers, particularly of the Supreme Court, charge totally exorbitant and unjustified fees, some charging upto Rs.30 lacs for one day's appearance. A limit must be placed on lawyers fees by suitable legislation. Lawyers cannot be allowed to be looters.

The Bar Councils have proved to be ineffective in checking professional misconduct by lawyers. The Consumer Protection Act will be much more effective, and put some fear into lawyers indulging in wrong practices.

It is a great honour to be invited to Berkeley University, which has an outstanding reputation in the world as a great center of higher learning.

Today I am going to speak on ' The Future of India '. This would be an interesting subject to many of you as many of you would be from India or neighbouring countries, and also because India is a huge country with 1250 million people, and so what happens there is likely to affect the whole world.

India is presently passing through a transitional period in its history, transition from feudal agricultural society to modern industrial society.

A transitional period is a very painful and turbulent period in history. If we see the history of Europe from roughly the 16th to the 19th centuries, when Europe was passing through this transition from feudalism to a modern society we find that this period was full of turbulence, turmoil, wars, revolutions, chaos, social churning, intellectual ferment, etc. There was the Reformation by Martin Luther, Calvin, Henry the 8th, etc, and then the Counter Reformation, the Inquisition with its accompanying burning of heretics on the stake,, the St. Bartholomew massacre of Protestants ( called Huguenots ) in France in 1572, the Civil War in England, the 30 years war in Germany in which Catholics and Protestants massacred each other, the Wars of Spanish Succession, the 7 year war, the French Revolution etc, with theories of Hobbes, Locke, Voltaire, Rousseau, Adam Smith, Montesquieu, the thinkers of the Enlightenment, etc. The whole of European society was thrown into turmoil during this period. It was only after going through this fire that modern society emerged in Europe.

India is presently going through this fire. We are going through a very painful and turbulent period in our history. Presently India is neither totally feudal, nor totally modern, but somewhere in between. My guess is that the transition will last another 15-20 years or so, and so the next 15-20 years in India will be very turbulent.

What is a transition in history ? It is a period when the old feudal society is being uprooted and torn apart, when old values are being destroyed, but have not been replaced with new values of industrial society. Everything has become topsy turvy and chaotic. It is a period when, as Shakespeare said in Macbeth " Fair is foul and foul is fair ". In other words, what was regarded good earlier is regarded bad now, and what was regarded bad earlier is regarded good today.

For example, in feudal India the caste system was regarded good, but today the enlightened section of Indian society regards it as outdated and bad. In feudal society, one could not choose whom he/she will marry. One's parents decided this. Earlier love marriage was regarded as bad. Now it is acceptable in the enlightened section of Indian society

However, feudal elements are still very powerful in Indian society. For instance in some parts of India like western U.P. Haryana, etc if a young couple who fall in love have an inter caste or inter religious marriage both are brutally killed as an ' honour killing ' by the relatives or caste bodies ( called khap panchayats ).

Most Indians still regard the scheduled castes or dalits as inferior, and will not allow their daughters to marry a dalit boy, and if she does both are sometimes murdered. A pitched fight took place a few years back between dalit and non dalit boys in a University in Tamilnadu.

Casteism and communalism are still deeply entrenched in Indian society. In elections often votes are cast on the basis of caste and religion, instead of the merits of the candidate. That is why many criminals are elected. it is estimated that one third of the members of the Indian Parliament have a criminal background.

There is widespread discrimination against women and minorities. Female foeticide is common in many parts of India, and so is the practice of dowry deaths. Muslims have difficulty in getting jobs or houses on rent, and are often falsely implicated in terrorist acts..

Upto 1947 India was under British rule. The British policy was divide and rule, in other words, make Hindus and Muslims fight with each other ( see ' History in the Service of Imperialism ' by B.N. Pande and 'The Truth about Pakistan' online and on my blog justicekatju.blogspot.in). The effect of that policy is persisting even today.

There was very little animosity between Hindus and Muslims before 1857 when the Great Mutiny took place in which Hindus and Muslims jointly fought against the British. After suppressing the Mutiny the British rulers decided that the only way to control India was divide and rule, in other words, make Hindus and Muslims fight with each other ( see details in ' History in the Service of Imperialism ' online ). This communal poison was injected into our society systematically by the Britishers, year after year, decade after decade, resulting in the Partition of 1947 with all its horrors.

The British policy was broadly not to permit India to industrialize, and keep it agricultural and feudal. So heavy industries were not allowed to be set up, and only some textile and plantation industries, which too were initially under the control of Britishers, were set up in India. Obviously the Britishers thought that if India industrializes it would become a rival to British industry. So upto 1947 there were very few industries and very few engineers and technicians.

After Independence a Constitution was promulgated in January 1950. This Constitution was based on Western models. It borrowed Parliamentary democracy and an independent judiciary from England, fundamental rights and federalism from the U.S. Constitution, and the Directive Principles of State Policy from Ireland. This Constitution set up modern institutions and laid down modern principles such as equality, liberty, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc, the idea of our Founding Fathers being that this modern.Constitution will pull our backward semi-feudal society into the modern age. And to some extent it did.

Under the leadership of Prime Minister Nehru India set up a heavy industrial base, established several engineering colleges ( including some like the Indian Institutes of Technology of a very high order ) and technical institutes, schools and colleges, etc This no doubt led to much progress. Girls, who were earlier not given education also started going to schools.

However, after some time the feudals hijacked our democracy and made it an empty shell. Elections started relying on feudal caste and religious vote banks, and merit took a back seat.

Today the situation in India is that the economy has broadly stagnated ( despite all tall claims to the contrary ), and all state institutions have become hollow. People have largely lost respect for our politicians, I have called them ' Bourbons ' in a blog I have written ' Wake up Bourbons '. Most of them have no genuine love for the country, and are perceived by the Indian people as crooks and rascals who have looted India

About 75% of the 1250 million people in India are very poor. There is massive unemployment ( see my blog 'Unemployment in India ' ) .10 million youth enter the job market every year, but only half a million jobs are created in the organized sector of the economy annually. What do the rest do ? They become hawkers, street vendors, bouncers, stringers, criminals or prostitutes.

About 50% of our children are malnourished, some of them severely malnourished ( see my blog ' Malnutrition in India ' ), and a UNICEF report has said that one third of the malnourished children in the world are in India. 50% childhood deaths are due to malnourishment. India has one of the highest infant mortality rates. Many children die due to preventable causes e.g. low birth weight, pregnancy complications, diseases, poor sanitation, dehydration, diarrhoeia, etc. Half our women are anaemic

Healthcare is almost non existent for the masses, though the rich have excellent hospitals ( see my blog ' Healthcare in India ' ),, Good educational institutions are available only to a few children, the gap between the rich and poor is increasing, prices of foodstuffs etc have skyrocketed, corruption is widespread ( despite all the talk against it ), farmers are regularly committing suicide, etc. All this is an explosive mixture.

It is said that under the new Indian Government GDP is growing. The question, however, remains, who is getting the fruits of this growth, is it the Indian masses, or just a handful of big businessmen ?

The one and only test of every system is whether under it the standard of living of the masses is rising or not. In India the answer is clearly in the negative.

In perhaps the greatest speech delivered by anyone in the 20th century President Franklin Roosevelt called for a Second Bill of Rights in a speech delivered to the nation on 11th January 1944. He said that the Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution had clearly proved to be inadequate. A hungry or unemployed man has no use of liberty or equality or freedom of speech. Hence President Roosevelt called for an Economic Bill of Rights, providing for each American (1) Employment with a living wage (2) Food, clothing and leisure (3) Medical care (4) Social Security. Fair income to farmers, etc.(5) Good education, and (6) Housing.

In India these economic rights have been mentioned in Part 4 of the Indian Constitution, called the Directive Principles of State Policy, but these have expressly been made non enforceable by Article 37. Since there is little likelihood that these economic rights will be provided to the Indian masses any time in the near future , I am afraid India is heading for very turbulent times.

So the future of india, as I have said earlier, is that the next 15-20 years are going to be very turbulent and chaotic, but after this period I am confident a just social and economic order will emerge in India in which the Indian masses will get decent lives and a high standard of living

I am all for intermarriage between scheduled castes and non scheduled castes, and I appeal to Indian youth that if they genuinely fall in love with a scheduled caste boy/girl go ahead and marry him/her. Most non scheduled caste parents are full of casteist rubbish in their heads, and stupidly look down on scheduled castes as inferior. So disobey them in this matter and show your independence and enlightened minds, even if you have to suffer some hardship on this account. This will also serve the interest of national integration.

Thursday, 19 March 2015

Both Houses of the Indian Parliament have condemned me for my statements about Gandhi and Subhas Chandra Bose without giving me an opportunity of hearing, thus violating the basic principle of natural justice that no one should be condemned unheard.
This reminds me of an episode in Lewis Carrol's ' Alice in Wonderland ', which is quoted below
:
" 'Let the jury consider their verdict,' the King said, for about the twentieth time that day.

'No, no!' said the Queen. 'Sentence first - verdict afterwards.'

'Stuff and nonsense!' said Alice loudly. 'The idea of having the sentence first!'

'Hold your tongue!' said the Queen, turning purple.

'I won't!' said Alice.

'Off with her head!' the Queen shouted at the top of her voice. "

So with profound respect to the Hon'ble Members of the Indian Parliament, I have to say that they have acted like the Queen of Hearts in ' Alice in Wonderland '.
Since I was not given a hearing by Parliament I decided to go to the Court of Public Opinion and defend myself before the people who are supreme in a democracy.. Hence this brief article in ' The Hindustan Times '.

Wednesday, 18 March 2015

A class 11 student has been arrested for posting on facebook an alleged statement of Mr. Azam Khan, U.P. Minister.

I have perused the post. It is certainly objectionable, and Mr. Azam Kan has denied making such a statement.

The statement says " Secularism and love of nation is forbidden in Islam ". This is certainly objectionable, and is likely to incite communal feelings. Even if it has only been shared, that makes no difference. In a country with so much diversity as ours we must take care not to hurt the feelings of any community. To say that love of the nation is forbidden in Islam is bound to hurt the feelings of Muslims, the vast majority of whom are as patriotic as the vast majority ofHindus.

However, in my opinion, instead of arresting the boy the better course of action would have been for Mr. Azam Khan to have denied issuing such a statement, and asked for removal of that post from facebook.

It may be mentioned that arrest is not a must in every case where an F.I.R. of a cognizable offence is registered with the police. This is obvious from section 157 (1) Criminal Procedure Code. which reads :

" 157. Procedure for investigation

(1) If, from information received or otherwise, an officer in charge of a police station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered under section 156 to investigate, he shall forthwith send a report of the same to a Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of such offence upon a police report and shall proceed in person, or shall depute one of his subordinate officers not being below such rank as the State Government may, by general or special order, prescribe in this behalf, to proceed, to the spot, to investigate the facts and circumstances of the case, and, if necessary, to take measures for the discovery and arrest of the offender; "

The use of the words "and, if necessary " in the above provision clearly indicates that it is not incumbent on the police to arrest in every case, rather it is discretionary.

In Joginder Kumar vs. State of U. P. A.I.R. 1994 S.C. 1349 ( see online ) the Supreme Court observed : " No arrest can be made because it is lawful for the police officer to do so. The existence of the power to arrest is one thing. The justification for the exercise of it is quite another.The police officer must be able to justify the arrest apart from his power to do so. Arrest and detention in police lock-up of a person can cause incalculable harm to the reputation and self-esteem of a person. No arrest can be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission of an offence made against a person. It would be prudent for a police officer in the interest of protection of the constitutional rights of a citizen and perhaps in his own interest that no arrest should be made without a reasonable satisfaction reached after some investigation as to the genuineness and bona fides of a complaint and a reasonable belief both as to the person's complicity and even so as to the need to effect arrest. Denying a person of his liberty is a serious matter. "

Thus the Supreme Court has held that arrest is not a must in every case. In the same decision the Supreme Court has noted that the National Police Commission in its Third Report has observed that 60% arrests in India are unnecessary or unjustified, and that arrests are a major source of corruption in the police.

In my opinion arrest was unnecessary in this case, and the boy should have been let off with a warning and told to remove the objectionable post.

I have been asked by several persons to comment on D.K. Ravi's death. His body was found hanging on a fan in his flat.

The Karnataka Government claims that preliminary police investigation shows that it was a case of suicide due to personal reasons. But everyone knows that the police in India is not very reliable and trustworthy. Also they are not trained in scientific investigation and do not have the equipment for the same.

Unless it is known positively whether it was suicide or murder what comment can be made ?

All I can say is that taking on the mafia in India is extremely hazardous. They are powerful people with political links.

I am not justifying corruption. All I am saying is that bureaucrats should know their limits. Corruption is too widespread and too deeply entrenched in India for anyone to eliminate it. The person trying to do so is likely to be eliminated.

This party of jokers, with its Don Quixote and his Sancho Panzas, is going national, thinking Delhi will be repeated everywhere.

They forget that in most states in India votes are normally cast on the basis of caste, religion.and some other factors, not on the basis of electricity and water bills, as in Delhi. Delhi does not represent India. It is states like U.P. Bihar, M.P. Tamilnadu, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Gujarat, West Bengal, etc which represent India.

Kejriwal is not a fool. He knows that if he seriously and genuinely tries to suppress corruption he will meet the same fate as D.K.Ravi. So he will only make a show of combating corruption by suspending some small fries like clerks, etc while turning a Nelson's eye to the sharks and crocodiles.
After all, he admitted publicly that he is a bania who knows how to do ' dhandha ' !

Tuesday, 17 March 2015

Elizabeth was one of the greatest rulers the world has ever seen. When she came to the throne in 1558 England was a second rate power. By the time she died in 1603 it had become a first rate power, and about her Pope Sixtus 5 said " She is only a woman, mistress of only half an island, and yet she makes herself feared by Spain, by France, by the Empire, by all ".

One of the causes of Elizabeth's success was that she chose very competent and honest advisers who were devoted to her, William Cecil ( who later became Lord Burghley ) and Francis Walsingham. When she appointed Cecil as her Secretary of State and member of her Privy Council, she told him " This judgment I have of you, that you will not be corrupted by any manner of gift, and that you will be faithful to the state, and that without respect of my private will, you will give me that counsel you think best ". As Kautilya has written in Arthashastra, to be successful, a king must have good advisers. One main reason of Emperor Akbar's success was due to his ' nav ratnas '.

Elizabeth was a very shrewd ruler. Her motto was ' Video et taceo ' i.e. ' I see, and say nothing '. When she came to power she was surrounded by enemies, both internal ( especially the Catholics ) and external, such as Spain and France. She tactfully played them against each other, using proposals for marriage as a tool.

Her foreign policy was basically defensive. She often said " I do not like wars. They have uncertain outcomes ". But when war came with Spain, her fleet inflicted a decisive defeat on the Spanish Armada.

Elizabeth was just, but also firm. When Catholics were conspiring to replace her with her Catholic cousin Mary Queen of Scots, she got Mary executed. This was necessary to send a message to conspirators that this will be their fate.

Elizabeth's reign witnessed the great heights of English drama in the plays of Shakespeare and Marlow.

I have been invited by the Institute of South Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley on 19th March to speak on ' The Future of India '. The function is from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. I have prepared the gist of my speech and sent it to Prof. Goldman, the Director.

Berkeley is one of the eminent Universities in the world, with several Nobel laureates on its faculty

<< Thursday, March 19, 2015 >>

The Future of India: Lecture by Justice Markandey Katju, Former Chairman of the Press Council of India and Former Justice of the Supreme Court of India

Monday, 16 March 2015

The Congress Party, through its spokesman Anand Sharma, has called me a person with ' a sick mentality '. Wonderful news !

The party which looted the country for several decades is doing me an honour.

It is well known that during UPA government scam followed scam, and not of crores of rupees but lakhs of crores, e.g. 2G scam, coalblock scam, Commonwealth games scam, etc. All this pilfered wealth would probably be stacked in foreign banks.

I may be sick, but your party is a bunch of shameless looters Mr. Sharma.

Sunday, 15 March 2015

Peter the Great is one of my heroes. He modernized Russia, just like Emperor Meiji ( 1852-1912 ) modernized Japan, and Mustafa Kemal Ataturk ( 1881-1938 ) modernized Turkey. All these three modernizers of their countries used ruthless measures to crush the opposition by those who did not want changes.

Peter went to Western Europe in 1697 to study modern technology for shipbuilding and other industries. He wrote on a seal before his departure " I am a pupil, and need to be taught ". Peter went incognito with some companions as far west as England. He personally interviewed and recruited many technical persons for service in Russia. He was shown the British fleet, and he determined to set up a fleet in Russia.

After returning to Russia, Peter began modernizing Russian society and introduced European technology. He crushed the revolt of the Streltsi regiments and Bulavin ruthlessly. He sent young men for technical training abroad, and founded the Russian Academy of Science for scientific research. He also st up several technical institutes such as the School of Mathematics and navigation.

In 1703 Peter built a new capital, St. Petersburg, which remained the capital of Russia till the Russian Revolution of 1917.

By the time Peter died, he had dragged Russia out of much of its backwardness and transformed many of its medeival social and political institutions and customs to modern, Westernized ones, and made Russia a great power in the world.

India too needs to follow Peter's example, and take tough measures to modernize the country and make it a first rate, highly industrialized and prosperous nation in the world

Saturday, 14 March 2015

The British rulers in India were superb administrators. Let me tell you some features of their administration in India :

1. In their own country, England, the British had the system of ' His Majesty's Loyal Opposition '. In other words, the Government is mine, and the Opposition is also mine.

In India, the Viceroy, Governors, senior officials, etc were of course Britishers, but the leader of the Congress Party, the principal Opposition to the Government, Gandhi, was also a British agent ( as I have pointed out in my earlier posts ), and the leader of the Opposition to this Opposition, the Muslim League, Jinnah, was also a British agent. Thus this triumvirate was entirely under British control.

2. The British knew that no rule can last long unless it is respected by the people. Hence they created the 2 tier system of administration.

The lower level officials, the police daroga ( sub inspector ), patwari, etc were all Indians. But the officials at the higher level, the Collector, the High Court Judge, etc were usually Britishers.

It was the officials at the lower level who were in direct touch with the people, and who directly oppressed the people. So Indian people thought that their oppressors were Indians, but if they wanted justice they had to go to the British officials who at the higher level, the Collector and the High Court Judge.

3. If some excess was committed by some over zealous British official, e.g. Brigadier Dyer at Jallianwala Bagh, the British Government immediately appointed a Commission, e.g. the Hunter Commission in the case of the Jallianwala incident. This would diffuse the situation.

The truth was that the British in fact looted India. India had over 30%of world trade and was a prosperous country before the British came. By the time they left in 1947 our share in the world trade went down to 2% and we had became a very poor country. However, the British were successful in creating an impression among most Indians that British rule was beneficial to India, and the Britishers were our well wishers, though in reality they were looters and murderers of about 100 million Indians who died of starvation because of the famines created by British rule ( see my blogs ' Dinner at the German Embassy ', 'The Great Bengal Famine', etc on justicekatju.blogspot.in )

Thursday, 12 March 2015

Beautiful ! So the Lok Sabha too has passed a resolution condemning me, after the condemnation by the Rajya Sabha. I seem to be becoming another William Prynne, or Pym or John Wilkes or Junius ( I wonder whether the Hon'ble Members of the House have ever heard of them ).

Now the serious question is about my punishment. One Hon'ble member suggested that an F.I.R, should be lodged against me. But under which provision of the Indian Penal Code ? Surely the House cannot order my ears to be cut off, as was done in the case of William Prynne ?

I can imagine the Hon'ble members scratching their heads and feverishly turning the pages of the Penal Code trying to find some section which will incriminate me. May I make a humble suggestion to them ? There is an Act called the Lunatics Act, which will be most appropriate for me..I am sure that will serve the purpose, and I should be locked up in some lunatic asylum.

I have often been criticized for using harsh and intemperate language.

I reply by using the words of another of my heroes, William Lloyd Garrison ( 1805-1879 ), whose biography I am presently reading. Garrison was an American editor and publisher of the journal ' The Liberator ', who all of his life passionately denounced and spoke out against slavery.

In the very first issue of ' The Liberator ' published on 1.1.1831 from Boston, Garrison wrote :

"I am aware that many object to the severity of my language, but is there not cause for severity ?

I will be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. On this subject, I do not wish to think or speak or write with moderation. No! No!

Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm ; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher ; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen ;--but urge me not to use moderation in a cause like the present.

I am in earnest, I will not equivocate, I will not retreat a single inch----AND I WILL BE HEARD. "

Today the conditions in India are so critical that harsh and truthful language is required, the uncompromising language of Martin Luther, not the compromising language of Erasmus. Too long have the Indian people been deceived for niceties to be observed now. A blunt knife draws no blood.

Ranjit Singh is one of my heroes, like Ashoka, Akbar, Rana Pratap, etc

Known as the Lion of the Punjab, Ranjit Singh is an outstanding figure in Indian history, renowned as a brave fighter, conqueror and empire builder.

Beginning his career only as chief of one of the twelve Sikh misls ( confederacies ) in the Punjab, Ranjit Singh united them, and by the prowess of his arms established a huge empire in North India, extending from the Khyber pass in the North West, the river Sutlej in the East, deserts of Sind in the south, and China and Tibet in the North. By his secular and benevolent policies Ranjit Singh, though a devout Sikh himself, endeared himself to his subjects, the majority of whom were Muslims.

Ranjit Singh was much ahead of his times in almost every field, military organization, civil administration, and above all, his totally secular treatment of all his subjects belonging to diverse faiths.

Soon after conquering Lahore, Ranjit Singh offered prayers at the famous Badshahi mosque. He gave liberal grants to the mosque for its upkeep, and also to holy shrines like the Kashi Vishwanath Temple at Benares ( whose gold covering, which can be seen even today, was a a gift of the Maharaja ), Lord Jagannath temple in Puri, various temples in Haridwar, dargahs of Baba Farid in Pak Pattan and of Mian Mir in Lahore, and, of course, the Golden Temple at Amritsar.

Ranjit Singh appointed competent people to the highest posts irrespective of their religion, e.g. Fakir Azizuddin was appointed as his Foreign Minister,.his brother Fakir Nur-ud-din as the Home Minister, and another brother, Fakir Imam-ud-din as in charge of the treasury.There were a large number of Hindu and Muslim officers, apart from Sikhs, in Ranjit Singh's army and civil administration, which was totally secular in character. There were no forced conversions in his reign, no communal riots, and no second class citizenship. Hindu, Muslim and Sikh fought shoulder to shoulder in his army and shed their blood for him gladly. His commander Hari Singh Nalwa captured Kabul, and another commander Zorawar Singh conquered Kashmir and Lhasa, and marched into the depths of Tibet. He also had French generals, Allard, Ventura and Avitable in his army,which they modernized.

Ranjit Singh has become a legend in Indian history, particularly of Punjab.

Jinnah is called 'Qaid-e-Azam', ( leader of the People) by Pakistanis, who regard him as a hero.

But what is the reality ?

It was Jinnah who relentlessly advocated the bogus two nation theory (that Hindus and Muslims are two separate nations) and the mischievous British policy of divide and rule which resulted in Partition of India in 1947 with all its horrors. (Please read Saadat Hasan Manto's stories about Partition in this connection).

It is estimated that as a result of Partition 5 lac Hindus and Muslims were killed and millions uprooted and driven out of their native places. Was he ever distressed by the terrible unhappiness which was caused as a direct result of his actions ? Was his sleep disturbed by the thousands of people killed in Calcutta and elsewhere as a result of his call for ' Direct Action ' in August1946 ? Not at all. All that he wanted was to satisfy his ambition to become Qaid-e-Azam and head of the fake, artificial country called Pakistan ( see my article ' The Truth about Pakistan ' online and on my blog justicekatju.blogspot.in ), which was the goal of the British whose loyal stooge he was, and the sole aim of creating which was to keep Hindus and Muslims fighting with each other.

Pakistan was really created by the British, but they got the loyal service of those two rascals, Gandhi and Jinnah. The tragedy is that these two rogues are still hero worshipped in India and Pakistan, when they should have been condemned. Does this not prove what I have been saying for long, that 90% Indians ( in whom I include Pakistanis.also, since Pakistan is no country but is really part of India, and will one day revert to India ). are fools ?

I call Gandhi as a ' Chaalak Paakhandi ' ( A cunning hypocrite ). He is the root cause of most of the evils in public life in India today. When such a fake and fraud, who furthered the British policy of divide and rule by constantly injecting religion into politics by speaking publicly for decades of Hindu religious ideas e.g.Ramrajya, go-raksha ( cow protection ), varnashram dharma ( caste system ), brahmachjarya ( celibacy ), etc which were bound to drive Muslims towards the Muslim League and India towards Partition, and who effectively diverted the freedom struggle from the revolutionary direction towards which Bhagat Singh, Surya Sen ( Masterda ), Chandrashekhar Azad, Ashfaqulla, Rajguru, Ram Prasas Bismil, Khudiram Bose and others were taking it to, towards harmless nonsensical channels like satyagrah, and who preached reactionary economic ideas like handspinning by charkha and the deceptive idea of trusteeship, was designated as 'The Father of the Nation' soon after Independence in 1947, then the present pathetic state and low level of Indian public life became inevitable.

Unless we strip the mask from the face of this cunning fraud, and expose him as a feudal minded hypocrite serving British interests, no improvement is possible.

Wednesday, 11 March 2015

I regard the true freedom fighters of our country as Surya Sen ( Masterda ), and his other compatriots of the Anushilan Samiti and Jugantar, Bhagat Singh, Khudiram Bose, Chandrashekhar Azad ( whose memorial in Alfred Park in Allahabad I would visit often to bow my head there ), Ashfaqulla, Rajguru, Ram Prasad Bismil ( whose song ' Sarfaroshi ki tamanna ab hamaare dil mein hai ' is known to many ), etc.

In our national historiography these real patriots are barely mentioned, they are generally relegated to a footnote, and treated as mavericks, deviants or outsiders, not freedom fighters. That fake ' Mahatma' and his coterie, and that pawn of the Japanese fascists, are depicted as the real freedom fighters.

Gandhi described the militant Indian youth fighting against British Imperialism as ' misguided souls ' . He often said that militant nationalism was injurious to India's struggle for freedom. In reality he knew that if those methods became popular among the Indian masses his own popularity would decline, and his ' Mahatmahood ' may disappear.

When the British sentenced Bhagat Singh to death, Gandhi made no effort to save his life. He never wrote any letter to the British Viceroy to commute his sentence , nor did he issue any public appeal for this purpose, and he never went to meet Bhagat Singh in jail when the latter was on hunger strike.

By diverting the genuine freedom struggle against the British from its revolutionary path to harmless and nonsensical channels like satyagrah, Gandhi was ensuring that British rule over India would continue.

It is said that Gandhi gave us Independence in 1947. This is totally false. In fact by diverting the genuine revolutionary independence struggle against the British in India ( see one of my earlier posts ) to harmless and nonsensical channels like ' Satyagrah ' Gandhi was ensuring that India should not become independent.

Why then did the British leave ? Surely it was not because of the dramas Gandhi was doing ( fasting, salt march, etc ). Does anyone give up an Empire because of this ?

No, it was because Germany attacked England in the Second World War and considerably weakened it ( in fact Germany would probably have conquered England if America had not helped it ) that England, realizing that she could not continue holding on to India politically, withdrew. So it is not Gandhi who gave us Independence but Adolf Hitler ( though of course that was not his intention )

I have also called ' Netaji ' Subhas Chandra Bose a Japanese agent, a remark over which many people have got incensed. But If ' Netaji ' was not a Japanese agent, why did he give up the fight against the British when the Japanese surrendered ? He should have carried on a guerilla war against the British.

If the Japanese had been victorious against the British do you seriously think they would have granted independence to India ? No, they would have made India a Japanese colony, and ruthlessly exploited and looted it, as they did to parts of China which were under their occupation..

In fact Bose was being used by the Japanese, and they would have bumped him off the moment his utility for them was over. He was no doubt a brave and personally honest man, but he had become an agent of Japanese fascist imperialism.

The genuine patriots and revolutionaries, who have been sidelined in our history, were as much victims of the Congress Party, which was firmly in Gandhi's grip, as of British Imperialism

O wonderful news ! The Rajya Sabha ( the upper House of the Indian Parliament ) has passed a resolution condemning me !

But of course that is not enough. I must also be punished for what I said about that fake who is called the Father of the Indian Nation, and that agent of the Japanese fascists. A mere censure is no punishment.

So some of them wanted to strip me of the perks and facilities I have as a retired Supreme Court Judge. But then again that will require amendment of the rules, because after all I am indeed a retired Supreme Court Judge.

May I make a humble.suggestion to the Hon'ble Members of the House ( because evidently they have run out of ideas ). Just pass a resolution that immediately on my return to India I will be arrested and hanged, drawn and quartered.without any trial. Na rahe baans na baje baansuri !